Golan v. Saada

Last updated

Golan v. Saada
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 22, 2022
Decided June 15, 2022
Full case nameNarkis Aliza Golan v. Isacco Jacky Saada
Docket no. 20-1034
Citations596 U.S. ___ ( more )
Argument Oral argument
Holding
A court is not categorically required to examine all possible ameliorative measures before denying a Hague Convention petition for return of a child to a foreign country once the court has found that return would expose the child to a grave risk of harm.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas  · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito  · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan  · Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh  · Amy Coney Barrett
Case opinion
MajoritySotomayor, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

Golan v. Saada, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The case reviewed if all ameliorative measures must be taken into consideration before denying a Hague Convention petition once it is found that the child could face harm when returned to a foreign country. [1]

Contents

Background

Isacco Saada and Narkis Golan were a couple that had married in Milan, Italy. During their marriage, Saada was abusive towards Golan and they often argued. Sometimes, during arguments, Saada would "push, slap, and grab Golan and pull her hair." Saada had made threats against Golan's life on an occasion. Much of these acts of abuse happened in front of their son, B.A.S.

In July 2018, Golan flew with her son B.A.S. to the United States to attend her brother's wedding, but instead of returning to Italy afterward, she found refuge in a domestic violence shelter. After he found out, Saada filed a criminal complaint in Italy and filed a petition under the Hague Convention and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. [2]

Initially, the district court allowed B.A.S to return to Italy by seeking ameliorative measures, which included Saada providing Golan $20,000, dismissing his criminal complaint in Italy and seeking therapy, which was consistent with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's precedent at the time. On appeal, however, the Second Circuit found the measures were insufficient in mitigating the risk and vacated the judgment. [3]

On remand, the district court worked with the Italian Authorities to ensure that a protective order was filed against Saada to prevent Saada from approaching Golan and that social services in Italy oversaw Saada's therapy and parenting classes. The Second Circuit now affirmed. [4]

Golan filed a petition for a writ of certiorari. [5]

Supreme Court

The court granted certiorari on December 10, 2021, [6] and heard oral arguments on March 22, 2022. [7] On June 15, 2022, the Supreme Court vacated the Second Circuit's judgment in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. [8]

Related Research Articles

Tapia v. United States, 564 U.S. 319 (2011), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a federal court cannot give a criminal defendant a longer sentence to promote rehabilitation.

Chafin v. Chafin, 568 U.S. 165 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the appeal of a district court's decision to return a child to his country of residence is not precluded by the child's departure from the United States. It arose from the divorce proceedings of Mr. and Ms. Chafin; she wanted their daughter to live with her in Scotland, while he wanted her to remain in the United States with him.

Monasky v. Taglieri, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a child's "habitual residence" under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction should be determined based on the totality of the circumstances specific to the case, and should not be based on categorial requirements.

American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case relating to administrative law. The case centered on a rule from the Department of Health and Human Services, which reduced reimbursement rates for certain hospitals. Several hospital associations and hospitals affected by the rule sued HHS, alleging that it exceeded its statutory authority. The court was tasked with deciding if the rule was a reasonable interpretation of the law, and if the statute blocked judicial review of the rule in the first place.

Arizona v. City and County of San Francisco, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the ability of states to defend federal regulations in court. However, rather than resolving the questions presented, the Supreme Court dismissed review of the case as improvidently granted.

Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the ability of state officials to intervene to defend the constitutionality of state laws.

Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case related to immigration detention.

Shinn v. Ramirez, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court related to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. The court held that new evidence that was not in the state court's records, based on ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel, could not be used in an appeal to a federal court.

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act, in which the Court unanimously held that cargo loaders and ramp supervisors employed at airports are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act.

Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Thompson v. Clark, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning whether a plaintiff suing for malicious prosecution must show that they were affirmatively exonerated of committing the alleged crime. The Supreme Court, in a 6–3 opinion authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh held that no such requirement existed and that a plaintiff suing for malicious prosecution in the context of a Fourth Amendment "need only show that his prosecution ended without a conviction." Justice Samuel Alito dissented from the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch. Media coverage of the decision portrayed the Court's ruling as a victory for civil rights lawsuits.

Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. 465 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case related to habeas corpus.

Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt, 598 U.S. 39 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Affordable Care Act.

Patel v. Garland, 596 U.S. 328 (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the jurisdiction of federal courts over immigration appeals.

Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to immigration detention.

Fitisemanu v. United States was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to consider if the Insular Cases should be overturned and whether people living in American territories such as American Samoa are guaranteed birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Boechler v. Commissioner, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to Title 26 of the United States Code and equitable tolling. It is regarding the statutory interpretation of 26 U.S.C. § 6330(c) and whether the tax court would have jurisdiction over petitions to the tax court if the petition exceeded the 30 days time frame.

ZF Automotive U. S., Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd., 596 U.S. ___ (2022), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court on the scope of §1782 of Title 28 of the United States Code. The issue of statutory interpretation for the Court was whether a private commercial arbitral tribunal constitutes a "foreign or international tribunal" under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) and therefore empowers federal districts courts to compel the production by persons subject to their jurisdiction of documents and testimony for such tribunals.

Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U.S. 447 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding religious liberty and employment accommodations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Prior, Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison (1977) had established that an employer could deny an employee religious exemptions from work if they could show "undue hardship" in making the accommodation, a vague phrase at the center of Groff. The case was decided unanimously for Groff by the Court. While generally upholding Trans World, the court clarified that increased costs that are more than 'de minimis' are not sufficient to demonstrate 'undue hardship', and that the onus is on the employer to demonstrate that granting the exemption would incur "substantial increased costs" compared to the normal costs of business.

References

  1. ↑ "Golan v. Saada". Ballotpedia. Retrieved July 20, 2022.
  2. ↑ "Saada v. Golan". Oyez. Retrieved July 20, 2022.
  3. ↑ "Saada v. Golan, 18-CV-5292 (AMD) (RML) | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved July 20, 2022.
  4. ↑ "Saada v. Golan, No. 20-1544 | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved July 20, 2022.
  5. ↑ "Petition for writ of Certiorari (Golan v. Saada)" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved July 20, 2022.
  6. ↑ "No new relists, but one likely grant in an international child custody case". SCOTUSblog. December 2, 2021. Retrieved July 4, 2022.
  7. ↑ "Justices will weigh risk-reduction measures in international child-custody disputes". SCOTUSblog. March 21, 2022. Retrieved July 4, 2022.
  8. ↑ "Justices broaden trial courts' discretion in child-custody disputes under Hague Convention". SCOTUSblog. June 15, 2022. Retrieved July 4, 2022.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.